DOCSLIB.ORG

New Canaan URBITRANR EPORT

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
New Canaan URBITRANR EPORT Individual Station Report New Canaan URBITRANR EPORT CONTENTS: Stakeholder Interview Customer Opinion Survey Parking Inventory & Utilization Station Condition Inspection Lease Narrative and Synopsis Station Operations Review Station Financial Review URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. July 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 Stakeholder Interview URBITRANR EPORT URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. New Canaan Branch Only New Canaan was represented for the New Canaan branch, as Stamford did not participate. New Canaan According to the first selectman of the town, the agreement for Talmadge Hill and New Canaan stations are very straight-forward and work well. At Talmadge Hill station, CDOT owns only the platform, while the rest of the station area, e.g. the surface parking, is owned and maintained by the town. New Canaan station is owned by CDOT, as are the immediate parking facilities. The feeling is that the station and parking areas at New Canaan station, recently reconstructed, are well maintained. The town was concerned about liability issues and responsibilities for some activities and areas. As an example, the town evidently cleans the platforms while CDOT maintains them; sometimes the distinction between the two seems blurred. More importantly, the town feels that MNCR does not keep the track bed clean. With the new high platforms, more trash is collecting than in the past. There are also spikes, and ties left behind. Taxi activity on-site is an issue to the town. While the town can control activity, they do not feel that it is working well. They would like some help from CDOT’s compliance division for complaints and inspections. There is a dispatcher on site and they are hoping to see some improvement in the near future. To control who can pick-up at the station, the town has instituted rules regarding vehicle color and identifying name, pictures of the driver in the vehicle, etc. The town was complimentary of Carl Rosa and his responsiveness to their needs. The state spends most of its money on maintenance and operations, and will participate in some minor capital projects. The state recently paid for and constructed a new shelter at Talmadge Hill. The feeling is that it may be time to construct a new station at Talmadge Hill, with a full length platform and overhead protection. They cited West Redding and Wassaic as models. They would like CDOT to stay in the loop regarding station operations, and would like the state to inspect the stations on a regular basis. Their basic position is that unless CDOT is unhappy, they are not, and they do not feel any change in procedures is needed. They like having local control over day-to-day activities and feel they can be more responsive to the local community. They are concerned about parking issues if the state were to take over, specifically that lots now designated for New Canaan residents only would be open to everyone. Parking is the number one problem; by the 6:20 AM train all the meters are occupied, and the remaining parking is restricted to town permits. They give out about 2 permits per space. All spaces are generally filled by 8:30 AM. Talmadge Hill has 91 meters for general use, and the rest of the lots are permit controlled. The town is considering a plan to deck the “lumberyard” lot; one of the issues is that if CDOT helps in the financing of the deck, then the spaces would be open to non- residents. Local residents have fought any expansion at Talmadge Hill; better striping may provide an additional 70 spaces in the multi-tiered lots. 28 Customer Opinion Survey URBITRANR EPORT URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. Task 1.2:Technical Memorandum Customer Opinion Survey New Canaan Line New Canaan The response rate of 34% at the New Canaan Station was excellent. Of all respondents, 92% rode the train daily and an additional 5% rode at least once per week. Commuters made up 93% of customers surveyed, and 96% of respondents traveled during the peak periods. Of the respondents that parked at the station, 69% had parking permits at the time of the survey, and of those without permits, 41% were on a waiting list. Although the male to female ratio among surveyed customers has been high at most stations, the 86% male population is somewhat higher at New Canaan. The fact that 93% of responses were from customers aged 25-64 is not surprising given the typical profile of the work commuter. At New Canaan the remaining 7% were over 65 years of age. Finally, personal incomes were extremely high at this station; 94% reported salaries above $100,000, and the remaining 6% were above $75,000. As New Canaan is a recently refurbished station, it follows that customer ratings for the various parking and station elements should be fairly positive. In fact, ratings for the different aspects of the station at New Canaan were among the most favorable in the entire survey. In fact, only 2 of the 39 elements included in the (ease of passenger drop-off and parking security) were rated ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ by more than 50% of survey respondents. Furthermore, the percentages of ‘excellent’ ratings were quite high, and every element was noted to have improved by at least half of respondents. New Canaan respondents rated the elements at the station the highest on the New Canaan Line for the station building, amenities and platform elements. New Canaan change ratings were the highest on the New Canaan Line for all 4 categories of elements. The parking facilities at New Canaan did receive ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ ratings from at least a quarter of respondents for many of the different categories and the only 2 elements that were rated negatively by the majority of customers were included within the parking category. These were parking security (52% negative) and the ease of car or bus passenger drop-off (57% negative). Security remains a noteworthy complaint at many stations, although 71% of those who commented did indicate improvement at New Canaan. Parking maintenance, pathways to station, stairways and handicap accessibility were all rated with 80% approval or higher. Stairways were rated the highest of the parking elements with 92% satisfaction. Overpasses and underpasses do not exist at the New Canaan Station. Pathways to the station had the highest actual number of positive marks (80). Figure 249 shows how New Canaan respondents felt about the parking situation. Connecticut Department of Transportation 225 Task 1.2:Technical Memorandum Customer Opinion Survey Figure 249: New Canaan Station Parking Ratings Parking Ratings 120 100 80 Poor Fair Good 60 Excellent Responses 40 20 0 Pathway(s) to Entrances Parking Lot Stairways Parking Exits Parking Parking Handicap Parking Parking Ease of Car or Underpass Overpass St at io n Pavement Maintenance Availability Sign age Accessibility Lighting Security Bus Passenger Condition Drop-Off Attribute The station building received very favorable ratings; only the availability of seating prompted ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ ratings from more than a quarter of customers surveyed, and this too was seen to have improved recently. Ninety-eight percent of respondents were pleased with the overall condition of the station. Figure 250 describes the ratings of the station building in New Canaan. As was the case at most stations, absence of graffiti received the highest percentage of positive ratings (100% in this case). Eight of the 12 building elements received positive ratings exceeding 90%. The lowest rated element (seating availability) still received 63% favorable marks. Figure 250: New Canaan Station Building Ratings Station Building Ratings 120 Poor 100 Fair Good Excellent 80 60 Responses 40 20 0 Absence of Overall Building Cleanlines s Building Building Res trooms Availability of Handicap Building Ticket Booth Availability of Graffiti Condition Lighting Maintenance Climate Maps and Acces s ibility Security Hours Seating Control Schedules Attribute Connecticut Department of Transportation 226 Task 1.2:Technical Memorandum Customer Opinion Survey Amenities at the station were rated ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ by the majority of customers. Figure 251 displays the amenities ratings in New Canaan. The news/magazine stands were rated positively by 88% of respondents, making it the highest rated amenity. Bus drop-off/pick-up was rated positively by 61% of respondents, yet it was the lowest rated amenity. Figure 251: New Canaan Station Amenities Ratings Station Amenities Ratings 120 100 Poor Fair 80 Good Excellent 60 Responses 40 20 0 News /Magazine Stand A vailability of Tras h Cans Phones Taxi Stand Concession Stand Bus Drop-Off/Pick-Up Attribute Figure 252 describes the platform situation in New Canaan. All of the platform elements were rated at 70% or higher satisfaction. In fact, all but 2 elements were rated above 90% positive. Ninety-nine percent of respondents (all but 1 person who rated it ‘fair) rated the overall condition of the platform favorably. Overall condition was the highest rated element. The working condition of the public address system was the lowest rated platform element with a full 73% approval. Connecticut Department of Transportation 227 Task 1.2:Technical Memorandum Customer Opinion Survey Figure 252: New Canaan Station Platform Ratings Platform Ratings 120 Poor 100 Fair Good Excellent 80 60 Responses 40 20 0 Overall Condition Platform Maintenance Cleanliness Platform Lighting Shelters Handicap Acces s ibility W orking Condition of Public Address System Attribute Customer appreciation of the rehabilitation of New Canaan station appears quite evident, both in the proportion of favorable ratings and the number of customers who indicated an improvement for the various elements rated in the survey.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • August 2015 ERA Bulletin.Pub
    The ERA BULLETIN - AUGUST, 2015 Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 58, No. 8 August, 2015 The Bulletin TWO ANNIVERSARIES — Published by the Electric SEA BEACH AND STEINWAY TUNNEL Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated, PO Box The first Brooklyn Rapid Transit (BRT) was incorporated on August 29, 1896. 3323, New York, New steel cars started operating in revenue ser- BRT acquired the company’s stock on or York 10163-3323. N about November 5, 1897. The line was elec- vice on the Sea Beach Line (now ) and the new Fourth Avenue Subway one hundred trified with overhead trolley wire at an un- For general inquiries, years ago, June 22, 1915. Revenue opera- known date. contact us at bulletin@ tion began at noon with trains departing from A March 1, 1907 agreement allowed the erausa.org . ERA’s Chambers Street and Coney Island at the company to operate through service from the website is th www.erausa.org . same time. Two– and three-car trains were Coney Island terminal to 38 Street and New routed via Fourth Avenue local tracks and Utrecht Avenue. Starting 1908 or earlier, nd Editorial Staff: southerly Manhattan Bridge tracks. trains operate via the Sea Beach Line to 62 Editor-in-Chief : On March 31, 1915, Interborough Rapid Street and New Utrecht Avenue, the West Bernard Linder End (now D) Line, and the Fifth Avenue “L.” Tri-State News and Transit, Brooklyn Rapid Transit, and Public Commuter Rail Editor : Service Commission officials attended BRT’s Sea Beach cars were coupled to West End Ronald Yee exhibit of the new B-Type cars, nicknamed or Culver cars.
    [Show full text]
  • A Q U I F E R P R O T E C T I O N a R E a S N O R W a L K , C O N N E C T I C
    !n !n S c Skunk Pond Beaver Brook Davidge Brook e d d k h P O H R R O F p S o i d t n n l c t u i l R a T S d o i ll l t e e lv i d o t R r r d r l h t l l a H r n l t r M b a s b R d H e G L R o r re R B C o o u l e t p o n D o e f L i s Weston Intermediate School y l o s L d r t e Huckleberry Hills Brook e t d W d r e g Upper Stony Brook Pond N L D g i b R o s n Ridgefield Pond a t v d id e g e H r i l Country Club Pond b e a R d r r S n n d a g e L o n tin a d ! R d l H B n t x H e W Still Pond d t n Comstock Knoll u d a R S o C R k R e L H d i p d S n a l l F tt h Town Pond d l T te r D o e t l e s a t u e L e c P n n b a n l R g n i L t m fo D b k H r it to Lower Stony Brook Pond o r A d t P n d s H t F u d g L d d i Harrisons Brook R h e k t R r a e R m D l S S e e G E o n y r f ll H rt R r b i i o e n s l t ld d d o r l ib l a e r R d L r O e H w i Fanton Hill g r l Cider Mill School P y R n a ll F i e s w L R y 136 e a B i M e C H k A s t n d o i S d V l n 3 c k r l t g n n a d R i u g d o r a L 3 ! a l r u p d R d e c L S o s e Hurlbutt Elementary School R d n n d D A i K w T n d o O n D t f R l g d R l t ad L i r e R e e r n d L a S i m a o f g n n n D d n R o t h n Middlebrook School ! l n t w Lo t a 33 i n l n i r E id d D w l i o o W l r N e S a d l e P g n V n a h L C r L o N a r N a S e n e t l e b n l e C s h f ! d L nd g o a F i i M e l k rie r id F C a F r w n P t e r C ld l O e r a l y v f e u e o O n e o a P i O i s R w e t n a e l a n T t b s l d l N l k n t g i d u o e a o R W R Hasen Pond n r r n M W B y t Strong
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut State Rail Plan, 2012
    DRAFT 2012 CONNECTICUT STATE RAIL PLAN __________________________________________________________________ THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 1 DRAFT 2012 CONNECTICUT STATE RAIL PLAN __________________________________________________________________ State of Connecticut Department of Transportation 2012-2016 Connecticut State Rail Plan Prepared by: BUREAU OF PUBLIC TRANSPORATION, OFFICE OF RAIL CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 50 UNION AVENUE, FOURTH FLOOR WEST NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT 06519 Page 2 DRAFT 2012 CONNECTICUT STATE RAIL PLAN __________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 7 CHAPTER 1 – STATE RAIL VISION, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES .............................. 9 1.1 MISSION STATEMENT, VISION, AND VALUES ........................................................................ 9 1.2 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR RAIL SERVICE IN CONNECTICUT ..................................... 10 CHAPTER 2 – FEDERAL AND STATE MANDATES .................................................. 13 2.1 FEDERAL LEGISLATION AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS ................................................ 14 2.2 STATE LEGISLATION AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS ..................................................... 15 CHAPTER 3 – DESCRIPTION OF RAIL SYSTEM IN CONNECTICUT ....................... 18
    [Show full text]
  • Customer Opinion Survey Final Report
    Task 1.2: Customer Opinion Survey Final Report URBITRANR EPORT URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. May 2003 Task 1.2:Technical Memorandum Customer Opinion Survey TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................1 METHODOLOGY.........................................................................................................................................................1 FINDINGS ..................................................................................................................................................................1 EXHIBIT 1: SURVEY SAMPLE.....................................................................................................................................2 COMPARISON TO METRO-NORTH RAILROAD CUSTOMER OPINION SURVEY ...........................................................10 CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL PROFILE OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS.........................................................12 SYSTEM-WIDE ANALYSIS OF SURVEY QUESTIONS 1, 2, AND 3 .................................................................................13 SYSTEM-WIDE ANALYSIS OF SURVEY QUESTIONS 4, 5, 6, AND 7 .............................................................................15 SYSTEM-WIDE ANALYSIS OF SURVEY
    [Show full text]
  • WATERBURY and NEW CANAAN BRANCH LINES NEEDS and FEASIBILITY STUDY Project 170-2562
    CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Bureau of Policy and Planning Intermodal Planning WATERBURY AND NEW CANAAN BRANCH LINES NEEDS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY Project 170-2562 Phases I and II Waterbury and New Canaan Branches Innovative Technologies Report Date: April 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................. i 1.0 Project Description ......................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 Innovative Technologies ................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Rail Vehicles .......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Waterbury Branch ................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2 New Canaan Branch............................................................................... 2-2 2.2 Track and Grade Crossings .................................................................................. 2-3 2.2.1 Track Design........................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.2 Grade Crossings ..................................................................................... 2-3 2.3 Train Control .......................................................................................................... 2-4 2.3.1 Block Signaling ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • New Haven Line Capacity and Speed Analysis
    CTrail Strategies New Haven Line Capacity and Speed Analysis Final Report June 2021 | Page of 30 CTrail Strategies Table of Contents Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ 1 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2 2. Existing Conditions: Infrastructure, Facilities, Equipment and Services (Task 1)............... 2 2.1. Capacity and Speed are Constrained by Legacy Infrastructure .................................... 3 2.2. Track Geometry and Slow Orders Contribute to Reduced Speeds ............................... 4 2.3. State-of-Good-Repair & Normal Replacement Improvements Impact Speed .............. 6 2.4. Aging Diesel-Hauled Fleet Limits Capacity ..................................................................... 6 2.5. Service Can Be Optimized to Improve Trip Times .......................................................... 7 2.6. Operating Costs and Revenue ........................................................................................ 8 3. Capacity of the NHL (Task 2)................................................................................................. 8 4. Market Assessment (Task 3) ............................................................................................... 10 4.1. Model Selection and High-Level Validation................................................................... 10 4.2. Market Analysis..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Station Report
    Individual Station Report Talmadge Hill URBITRANR EPORT CONTENTS: Stakeholder Interview Customer Opinion Survey Parking Inventory & Utilization Station Condition Inspection Lease Narrative and Synopsis Station Operations Review Station Financial Review URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. July 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 Stakeholder Interview URBITRANR EPORT URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. New Canaan Branch Only New Canaan was represented for the New Canaan branch, as Stamford did not participate. New Canaan According to the first selectman of the town, the agreement for Talmadge Hill and New Canaan stations are very straight-forward and work well. At Talmadge Hill station, CDOT owns only the platform, while the rest of the station area, e.g. the surface parking, is owned and maintained by the town. New Canaan station is owned by CDOT, as are the immediate parking facilities. The feeling is that the station and parking areas at New Canaan station, recently reconstructed, are well maintained. The town was concerned about liability issues and responsibilities for some activities and areas. As an example, the town evidently cleans the platforms while CDOT maintains them; sometimes the distinction between the two seems blurred. More importantly, the town feels that MNCR does not keep the track bed clean. With the new high platforms, more trash is collecting than in the past. There are also spikes, and ties left behind. Taxi activity on-site is an issue to the town. While the town can control activity, they do not feel that it is working well.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report - 2007
    ANNUAL REPORT - 2007 CONNECTICUT METRO NORTH / SHORE LINE EAST RAIL COMMUTER COUNCIL www.trainweb.org/ct CT Rail Commuter Council Page 1 2007 Annual Report 15 January 2008 Governor M. Jodi Rell Interim CDOT Commissioner Emil Frankel Senator Donald DeFronzo Rep. Antonio Guerrera CT Public Transportation Commission NY Metro-North Rail Commuter Council Inspector General – MTA Lee Sander – MTA Exec. Director & CEO Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: Pursuant to Connecticut Public Act 85-239 (now Sections 13b-212b and 13b -212c of the Connecticut General Statutes), The Connecticut Metro-North Rail Commuter Council is pleased to share with you our Annual Report for 2007. As you know, our legislative mandate is to be advocates for the interests of the more than 55,000 daily riders of Metro-North in Connecticut. Toward that end, we meet monthly with railroad officials… testify regularly before the legislature… speak before civic groups and share with the media our work on behalf of riders. Our report’s narrative highlights the important issues of the past year with embedded internet links for further information. Also attached are the Minutes of our meetings and monthly Operational Reports from Metro-North. We hope you find this report useful in understanding the challenges and opportunities facing rail commuters in Connecticut. Respectfully submitted, Jim Cameron Terri Cronin / Jeffrey Steele S. Robert Jelley Jim Cameron Terri Cronin / Jeffrey Steele S. Robert Jelley Chairman Co-Vice Chairmen Secretary CT Rail Commuter Council Page 2 2007 Annual Report COUNCIL VICTORIES ON BEHALF OF COMMUTERS: True to its legislative mandate to represent the interests of rail commuters in Connecticut, the Commuter Council helped change several policy decisions in 2007 for the benefit of commuters: ¾ Halt in plans to require commuters to use “opposite platforms” during winter.
    [Show full text]
  • South Western Region Long Range Transportation Plan 2007-2035 Update Schedule
    SouthSouth Western RegionRegion LongLong RangeRange TransportationTransportation PlanPlan 20072007--20352035 Endorsed by: South Western Region Metropolitan Planning Organization May 8, 2007 Prepared by: South Western Regional Planning Agency 888 Washington Blvd. 3rd Floor Stamford, CT 06901 203.316.5190 SOUTH WESTERN LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2007-2035 CONTENTS Guide to the Plan – Frequently Asked Questions………….. FAQ1- FAQ9 Introduction ......................................................................................... 1 The South Western Region ................................................................... 17 Regional Characteristics ....................................................................... 23 Transportation Inventory and Travel Characteristics............................ 28 Long Range Transportation Plan 2007 – 2035 ..................................... 39 Transportation Plan Update Components……………………………... 48 Regional Transportation Plan References……………………………... 50 The Transportation Planning Process ................................................... 51 Goals and Objectives ............................................................................ 53 Highway Systems and Operations ........................................................ 56 Transportation Systems Management and Operations.......................... 62 Safety ................................................................................................... 64 Road Condition....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Darien, Connecticut
    Welcome to Darien, Connecticut County: Fairfield Population: 21,114 Square Miles: 14.9 Government: Selectman Distance to Major Cities: Boston: 185 miles Hartford: 75 miles New York City: 43 miles A small, charming coastal town hugging the shoreline of Long Island Sound, Darien was once considered a summer destination for New Yorkers. Today, Darien, incorporated in 1820, has evolved into a vibrant and active community of more than 20,000 residents who have successfully integrated 21st century needs with Darien’s unique architectural and natural heritage. Darien is easily accessible to Interstate 95 and the Merritt Parkway. Travelers enjoy two Metro North stations – a commute of approximately 50 minutes from Noroton Heights and Darien. Talmadge Hill station (New Canaan Branch), and the Rowayton station (serving Norwalk), are conveniently located near town. Most trains run non-stop after Stamford into New York City's 125th Street, then Grand Central Terminal.I-95 has convenient Darien exits, and US Route 1, known locally as the Boston Post Road, runs east and west through the southern side of town. Westchester County, La Guardia, and JFK International Airports are all less than an hour’s drive. Residents enjoy a wide variety of resources, including approximately 30 acres of scenic shoreline, two public beaches, 205 acres of park and recreational facilities, a renowned indoor ice rink, and a highly respected equestrian center. Darien’s Ox Ridge Hunt Club was founded in 1914. Ox Ridge Hunt Club has hosted a number of important, nationally recognized horse shows over the years, including the Ox Ridge Charity Horse Show and the Ox Ridge Dressage Horse Show.
    [Show full text]
  • Mta Property Listing for Nys Reporting
    3/31/2021 3:48 PM MTA PROPERTY LISTING FOR NYS REPORTING COUNTY SECTN BLOCKNO LOTNO Property_Code PROPERTYNAME PROPERTYADDDRESS AGENCY LINE PROPERTYTYPE limaster LIRR Customer Abstract Property LIRR Customer Abstract Property LIR Main Line Station Bronx bbl05200 Bronx Whitestone Bridge Hutchson River parkway BT Block/Lot Bridge Bronx 9 mha04650 ROW b 125th & Melrose XXX St MN Harlem ROW Bronx 9 mha06600 ROW b 125th & Melrose Milepost 5,Sta-Mon# 31.5 MN Harlem ROW Bronx 12 mha09500 FORDHAM STATION Fordham Rd (Fordham U) MN Harlem Station Bronx mhu00343 Perm E'ment at Yankee Stadium Sta-mon 30.5 MN Hudson Payable Easement Bronx mhu06251 Spuyten Duyvil Substation Sta-Mon# 68.5 MN Hudson Payable Easement Bronx 19 mhu06301 Parking at Riverdale Milepost 12 , Sta-Mon# 68.5 MN Hudson Parking Bronx tbl03600 Unionport Shop Unionport Rd. NYCT White Plains Road Shop Bronx tbl65340 Con Edison Ducts East 174 St NYCT Block/Lot Ducts Bronx tbw32500 231ST 231 St-Broadway NYCT Broadway/7th Avenue Station Bronx tbw32600 238 ST 238 St-Broadway NYCT Broadway/7th Avenue Station Bronx tbw32700 242 ST 242 St-Van Cortlandt Pk NYCT Broadway/7th Avenue Station Bronx tco21000 161 ST Yankee Stadium 161 St/River Ave NYCT Concourse Station Bronx tco21100 167 ST 167 St/Grand Concourse NYCT Concourse Station Bronx tco21200 170 ST 170 St/Grand Concourse NYCT Concourse Station Bronx tco21300 174 175 STs 174-175 Sts/Grand Concourse NYCT Concourse Station Bronx tco21400 TREMONT AVE Tremont Ave/Grand Concourse NYCT Concourse Station Bronx tco21500 182 183 STs 183 St/Grand
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Report
    ENGINEERING REPORT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 132 FLAX HILL ROAD NORWALK, CONNECTICUT September 21, 2020 Revised April 20,2021 Prepared for: Workforce Partners, LLC PO Box 692 South Norwalk, CT 06856 Prepared By: Ricardo Ceballos, P.E. Professional Engineering Consulting Services 245 Sturges Highway Westport, CT 06880 (203)635-0922 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 132 Flax Hill Road Norwalk, CT PROJECT DESCRIPTION The descriptions and computations included within this Stormwater Management Plan and Appendix are provided in support of applications submitted by Workforce Partners, LLC to the City of Norwalk for permitting purposes related to site and building improvements at 132 Flax Hill Road in Norwalk. The site's storm water management system shall be sized to accommodate runoff from a 25-year design storm and the system shall be designed so that post development peak discharge rates, and stormwater runoff volumes, do not exceed predevelopment quantities. Per City requirements, the storm water management plan has been prepared by a Connecticut-licensed professional engineer. Location The project site is located at 132 Flax Hill Road, Norwalk, Connecticut (site); As shown in Figure 1 the site is located in South Norwalk. The 0.217-acre site is a fully developed urban area. Project Location Figure 1 Project Location – 132 Flax Hill Road, Norwalk, CT. Page 2 Existing Conditions The site has 1 existing residential building, a detached garage structure, a driveway, and walkways. The site’s open space are landscaped grass areas. The purpose of the proposed project is to demolish the existing garage structure and add additional parking and driveway areas. As shown on Appendix A, there are no stormwater features, catch basins, yard drains or storm pipes.
    [Show full text]